Maroney v WA

[2006] WASCA 130

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Totality principle
4. › Multiple offences committed while on parole
5. › Account to be taken of unexpired portion of previous sentence
6. › Whether sentencing court must take into account liability to serve unexpired parole period
7. › Sentence Administration Act 1995 (WA), ss 69(1), 71(1)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Prosecution's duty to provide accurate sentencing information
4. › Offender already under sentence at time of further sentencing
5. › Whether prosecution obliged to provide precise details of existing sentences
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against sentence
3. › Sentencing based on erroneous factual assumption
4. › Whether sentence vitiated by sentencing court's mistaken belief as to length of existing sentence
5. › Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 31(5)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Cumulative sentences
4. › Assault on public officer while in custody
5. › Whether sentence for assault on prison officer should be concurrent or cumulative
6. › Relevance of delay before commencement of cumulative sentence

Quick Take

The prosecution bears the duty to provide accurate information to a sentencing court about the precise terms of imprisonment an offender is already serving; this obligation does not fall upon the offender as a circumstance of mitigation. A sentencing court must take into account the full unexpired portion of a parole sentence when applying the totality principle, and speculation about future parole decisions is irrelevant. Sentences for assaults on prison officers should generally be cumulative, but the length must reflect the delay before commencement.